See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/261143356

Solar System tests of Hořava–Lifshitz gravity

Article  in  Proceedings of The Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences · May 2011
DOI: 10.1098/rspa.2010.0477 · Source: arXiv

CITATIONS READS
50 24

3 authors, including:

Tiberiu Harko Francisco S. N. Lobo

University College London University of Lisbon
316 PUBLICATIONS   8,473 CITATIONS    215 PUBLICATIONS   8,221 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Holographic duality and applications View project

Wormholes in Space-Time: Theory and Facts View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Francisco S. N. Lobo on 29 May 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Solar system tests of Hořava-Lifshitz gravity
Tiberiu Harko∗ and Zoltan Kovács†
Department of Physics and Center for Theoretical and Computational Physics,
The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam Road, Hong Kong

Francisco S. N. Lobo‡
Centro de Fı́sica Teórica e Computacional, Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa,
Avenida Professor Gama Pinto 2, P-1649-003 Lisboa, Portugal
(Dated: August 20, 2009)
Recently, a renormalizable gravity theory with higher spatial derivatives in four dimensions was
proposed by Hořava. The theory reduces to Einstein gravity with a non-vanishing cosmological
constant in IR, but it has improved UV behaviors. The spherically symmetric black hole solutions for
arXiv:0908.2874v1 [gr-qc] 20 Aug 2009

an arbitrary cosmological constant, which represent the generalization of the standard Schwarzschild-
(A)dS solution, has also been obtained for the Hořava-Lifshitz theory. The exact asymptotically flat
Schwarzschild type solution of the gravitational field equations in Hořava gravity contains a quadratic
increasing term, as well as the square root of a fourth order polynomial in the radial coordinate,
and it depends on one arbitrary integration constant. The IR modified Hořava gravity seems to be
consistent with the current observational data, but in order to test its viability more observational
constraints are necessary. In the present paper we consider the possibility of observationally testing
Hořava gravity at the scale of the Solar System, by considering the classical tests of general relativity
(perihelion precession of the planet Mercury, deflection of light by the Sun and the radar echo delay)
for the spherically symmetric black hole solution of Hořava-Lifshitz gravity. All these gravitational
effects can be fully explained in the framework of the vacuum solution of the gravity. Moreover, the
study of the classical general relativistic tests also constrain the free parameter of the solution.

PACS numbers: 04.50.Kd, 04.70.Bw, 97.10.Gz

I. INTRODUCTION order to test its viability more observational constraints

are necessary. In Ref. [11], potentially observable prop-
erties of black holes in the Hořava-Lifshitz gravity with
Recently, a renormalizable gravity theory in four di-
Minkowski vacuum were considered, namely, the grav-
mensions which reduces to Einstein gravity with a non-
itational lensing and quasinormal modes. It was shown
vanishing cosmological constant in IR but with improved
that the bending angle is seemingly smaller in the consid-
UV behaviors was proposed by Hořava [1, 2]. The lat-
ered Hořava-Lifshitz gravity than in GR, and the quasi-
ter theory admits a Lifshitz scale-invariance in time and
normal modes of black holes are longer lived, and have
space, exhibiting a broken Lorentz symmetry at short
larger real oscillation frequency in the Hořava-Lifshitz
scales, while at large distances higher derivative terms
gravity than in GR. In Ref. [12], by adopting the strong
do not contribute, and the theory reduces to standard
field limit approach, the properties of strong field grav-
general relativity (GR). The Hořava theory has received
itational lensing in the deformed Hǒrava-Lifshitz black
a great deal of attention and since its formulation various
hole were considered, and the angular position and mag-
properties and characteristics have been extensively an-
nification of the relativistic images were obtained. Com-
alyzed, ranging from formal developments [3], cosmology
pared with the Reissner-Norström black hole, a signifi-
[4], dark energy [5] and dark matter [6], and spherically
cant difference in the parameters was found. Thus, it was
symmetric solutions [7, 8, 9, 10]. Although a generic vac-
argued this may offer a way to distinguish a deformed
uum of the theory is anti-de Sitter one, particular limits
Hǒrava-Lifshitz black hole from a Reissner-Nordström
of the theory allow for the Minkowski vacuum. In this
black hole. In Ref. [13], the behavior of the effective po-
limit post-Newtonian coefficients coincide with those of
tential was analyzed, and the timelike geodesic motion
the pure GR. Thus, the deviations from the conventional
in the Hořava-Lifshitz spacetime was also explored. In
GR can be tested only beyond the post-Newtonian cor-
Ref. [14], the basic physical properties of matter form-
rections, that is for a system with strong gravity at as-
ing a thin accretion disk in the vacuum spacetime metric
trophysical scales.
of the Hořava-Lifshitz gravity models were considered.
In this context, IR-modified Hořava gravity seems to It was shown that significant differences as compared to
be consistent with the current observational data, but in the general relativistic case exist, and that the determina-
tion of these observational quantities could discriminate,
at least in principle, between standard general relativity
∗ Electronic
and Hořava-Lifshitz theory, and constrain the parameter
address: harko@hkucc.hku.hk
† Electronic address: zkovacs@mpifr-bonn.mpg.de
of the model.
‡ Electronic address: flobo@cii.fc.ul.pt It is the purpose of the present paper to consider the
 2

classical tests (perihelion precession, light bending and where G is Newton’s constant, R(3) is the three-
radar echo delay) of general relativity for static gravita- dimensional curvature scalar for gij , and Kij is the ex-
tional fields in the framework of Hoř ava-Lifshitz gravity. trinsic curvature, defined as
To do this we shall adopt for the geometry outside a
1
compact, stellar type object (the Sun), the spherically Kij = (ġij − ∇i Nj − ∇j Ni ) , (3)
symmetric, static metric obtained by Kehagias and Sfet- 2N
sos’s [10]. As a first step in our study we consider the where the dot denotes a derivative with respect to t.
classical tests of general relativity in arbitrary spherically The IR-modified Hořava action is given by
symmetric spacetimes, and develop a general formalism "
3 √ 2 κ2
Z
that can be used for any given metric. For the Kehagias S = dt d x g N 2 Kij K ij − λg K 2 − 4 Cij C ij


and Sfetsos’s metric, we first consider the motion of a κ 2νg
particle (planet), and analyze the perihelion precession.
κ2 µ ijk (3) (3)l κ2 µ2 (3) (3)ij
In addition to this, by considering the motion of a pho- + ǫ Ril ∇ j R k − Rij R
ton in the static Kehagias and Sfetsos’s field, we study 2νg2 8
the bending of light by massive astrophysical objects and κ2 µ2
 
4λg − 1 (3) 2
the radar echo delay, respectively. All these gravitational + (R ) − ΛW R(3) + 3Λ2W
8(3λg − 1) 4
effects can be explained in the framework of Kehagias #
2 2
and Sfetsos’s geometry. Existing data on light-bending κ µ ω
+ R(3) , (4)
around the Sun, using long-baseline radio interferome- 8(3λg − 1)
try, ranging to Mars using the Viking lander, and the
perihelion precession of Mercury, can all give significant where κ, λg , νg , µ, ω and ΛW are constant parameters.
and detectable Solar System constraints, associated with C ij is the Cotton tensor, defined as
Hořava-Lifshitz gravity. More exactly, the study of the 
1 (3) j

ij ikl (3)j
classical general relativistic tests, constrain the parame- C = ǫ ∇k R l − R δl . (5)
ter of the solution. In the context of the classical tests of 4
general relativity the Dadhich, Maartens, Papadopoulos Note that the last term in Eq. (4) represents a ‘soft’ vio-
and Rezania (DMPR) solution of the spherically symmet- lation of the ‘detailed balance’ condition, which modifies
ric static vacuum field equations in brane world models the IR behavior. This IR modification term, µ4 R(3) (we
was also extensively analyzed [15]. It was found that have used the notation of Ref. [8]), with an arbitrary
the existing observational solar system data constrain the cosmological constant, represent the analogs of the stan-
numerical values of the bulk tidal parameter and of the dard Schwarzschild-(A)dS solutions, which were absent
brane tension. in the original Hořava model.
This paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II, The fundamental constants of the speed of light c,
we present the action and specific solutions of static Newton’s constant G, and the cosmological constant Λ
and spherically symmetric spacetimes in Hořava-Lifshitz are defined as
gravity. In Sec. III, we consider the classical Solar Sys-
κ2 µ2 |λW | κ 2 c2 3
tem tests in general relativity, namely, the perihelion c2 = G= Λ W c2 .
Λ=
shift, the light deflection and the radar echo delay, for 8(3λg − 1)2 16π(3λg − 1) 2
arbitrary spherically symmetric spacetimes. In Sec. IV, (6)
we analyze the classical Solar System tests for the case Throughout this work, we consider the static and
of the Kehagias and Sfetsos’s (KS) asymptotically flat spherically symmetric metric given by
solution [10] of Hořava-Lifshitz gravity. We conclude our ds2 = −eν(r) dt2 + eλ(r) dr2 + r2 (dθ2 + sin2 θ dφ2 ), (7)
results in Sec. V.
where eν(r) and eλ(r) are arbitrary functions of the radial
coordinate r.
II. BLACK HOLES IN HOŘAVA-LIFSHITZ Imposing the specific case of λg = 1, which reduces to
GRAVITY the Einstein-Hilbert action in the IR limit, one obtains
the following solution of the vacuum field equations in
Hořava gravity,
Using the ADM formalism, the four-dimensional met-
ric is parameterized by the following
p
eν(r) = e−λ(r) = 1+(ω−ΛW )r2 − r[ω(ω − 2ΛW )r3 + β],
(8)
ds2 = −N 2 c2 dt2 + gij dxi + N i dt dxj + N j dt . (1)



where β is an integration constant [8].
By considering β = −α2 /ΛW and ω = 0 the solution
The Einstein-Hilbert action is given by given by Eq. (8) reduces to the Lu, Mei and Pope (LMP)
solution [9], given by
1 √
Z  
S= d4 x g N Kij K ij − K 2 + R(3) − 2Λ ,
16πG α2 √
eν(r) = 1 − ΛW r2 − √ r. (9)
(2) −ΛW
 3

Alternatively, considering now β = 4ωM and ΛW = 0, The line element Eq. (7) provides the following equa-
one obtains the Kehagias and Sfetsos’s (KS) asymptoti- tion of motion for r
cally flat solution [10], given by
ṙ2 + e−λ r2 φ̇2 = e−λ eν ṫ2 − 1 .


p (15)
eν(r) = 1 + ωr2 − r(ω 2 r3 + 4ωM ). (10)
Substitution of ṫ and φ̇ from Eqs. (14) gives
We shall use the Kehagias-Sfetsos solution for analyzing
the Solar System constraints of the theory. Note that L2
ṙ2 + e−λ = e−λ E 2 e−ν − 1 .


there are two event horizons at 2
(16)
r
h p i
r± = M 1 ± 1 − 1/(2ωM 2) . (11) The change of variable r = 1/u and the substitution
d/ds = Lu2 d/dφ transforms Eq. (16) into the form
To avoid a naked singularity at the origin, one also needs
2
to impose the condition

du 1 −λ 2 −ν
+ e−λ u2 =


2
e E e −1 . (17)
1 dφ L
ωM 2 ≥ . (12)
2
By formally representing e−λ = 1 − f (u), we obtain
2
Note that in the GR regime, i.e., ωM ≫ 1, the outer 2
E 2 −ν−λ

horizon approaches the Schwarzschild horizon, r+ ≃ 2M , du 1
+ u2 = f (u)u2 +
e − 2 e−λ ≡ G(u).
and the inner horizon approaches the central singularity, dφ L2 L
r− ≃ 0. (18)
By taking the derivative of the previous equation with
respect to φ we find
III. CLASSICAL TESTS OF GENERAL
RELATIVITY IN ARBITRARY SPHERICALLY d2 u
SYMMETRIC STATIC SPACE-TIMES + u = F (u), (19)
dφ2

At the level of the Solar System there are three funda- where
mental tests, which can provide important observational
evidence for general relativity and its generalizations, and 1 dG(u)
F (u) = . (20)
for alternative theories of gravitation in flat space. These 2 du
tests are the precession of the perihelion of Mercury, the
deflection of light by the Sun and the radar echo delay A circular orbit u = u0 is given by the root of the
observations, and have been used to successfully test the equation u0 = F (u0 ). Any deviation δ = u − u0 from a
Schwarzschild solution of general relativity and some of circular orbit must satisfy the equation
its generalizations. In order to constrain the Hořava- " #
d2 δ
 
Lifshitz gravity at the level of the Solar System, we first dF
δ = O δ2 ,


+ 1− (21)
have to study these effect in spherically symmetric space- dφ2 du u=u0
times with arbitrary metrics. Throughout the next Sec-
tions we use the natural system of units with G = c = 1. which is obtained by substituting u = u0 + δ into Eq.
(19). Therefore, in the first order in δ, the trajectory is
given by
A. The perihelion precession
s   !
dF
The motion of a test particle in the gravitational field δ = δ0 cos 1− φ+β , (22)
du u=u0
of the metric given by Eq. (7) can be derived from the
variational principle
where δ0 and β are constants of integration. The angles
Z r   of the perihelia of the orbit are the angles for which r is
δ −eν ṫ2 + eλ ṙ2 + r2 θ̇2 + sin2 θφ̇2 ds = 0, (13) minimum, and hence u or δ is maximum. Therefore, the
variation of the orbital angle from one perihelion to the
where the dot denotes d/ds. It may be verified that the next is
orbit is planar, and hence without any loss of generality 2π 2π
we can set θ = π/2. Therefore we will use φ as the an- φ= q = . (23)
1− dF

1−σ
gular coordinate. Since neither t nor φ appear explicitly du u=u0
in Eq. (13), their conjugate momenta are constant,
The quantity σ defined by the above equation is called
eν ṫ = E = constant, r2 φ̇ = L = constant. (14) the perihelion advance. It represents the rate of advance
 4

of the perihelion. As the planet advances through φ ra- which is the standard general relativistic result.
dians in its orbit, its perihelion advances through σφ ra- B. The deflection of light
dians. From Eq. (23) σ is given by
s   In the absence of external forces a photon follows a
dF null geodesic, ds2 = 0. The affine parameter along the
σ =1− 1− , (24)
du u=u0 photon’s path can be taken as an arbitrary quantity, and
we denote again by a dot the derivatives with respect to
or, for small (dF/du)u=u0 , by the arbitrary affine parameter. There are two constants
of motion, the energy E and the angular momentum L,
given by
 
1 dF
σ= . (25)
2 du u=u0
eν ṫ = E = constant, r2 φ̇ = L = constant. (31)
For a complete rotation we have φ ≈ 2π(1 + σ), and
the advance of the perihelion is δφ = φ − 2π ≈ 2πσ. In The equation of motion of the photon is
order to be able to perform effective calculations of the
perihelion precession we need to know the expression of L ṙ2 + e−λ r2 φ̇2 = eν−λ ṫ2 , (32)
as a function of the orbit parameters. Let’s consider the
motion of a planet on a√Keplerian ellipse with semi-axis which, with the use of the constants of the motion can
a and b, where b = a 1 − e2 , and e is the eccentric- be written as
ity of the orbit. The surface area of the ellipse is πab.
Since the elementary oriented surface area of the ellipse L2
is d~σ = (~r × d~r) /2, the areolar velocity of the ṙ2 + e−λ = E 2 e−ν−λ . (33)
√ planet is r2
|d~σ /dt| = |~r × d~r| /2 = r2 (dφ/dt) /2 ≈ πa2 1 − e2 /T ,
where T is the period of the motion, which can be ob- By introducing the variable φ, and taking into account
tained from Kepler’s third law as T 2 = 4π 2 a3 /M . In Eqs. (31), then Eq. (33) can be expressed as
the small velocity limit ds ≈ dt, and the conservation of
gives r2 dφ/dt = L.
2
the relativistic angular momentum L2 L2

√ dr
Therefore we
obtain L = 2πa2 1 − e2 /T and 1/L2 = + e−λ = E 2 e−ν−λ , (34)
r4 dφ r2
1/M a 1 − e2 .
As a first application of the present formalism we con- which may be rewritten as
sider the precession of the perihelion of a planet in the
Schwarzschild geometry, with eν = e−λ = 1 − 2M/r = e(ν+λ)/2 dr
1 − 2M u. Hence f (u) = 2M u. Since for this geometry dφ = p . (35)
ν + λ = 0, we obtain first [(E /L ) r − e ] r
2 2 2 ν

1
2M At the point of the light ray’s trajectory closest to the

G(u) = 2M u3 + E 2 − 1 + 2 u, (26)
L 2 L Sun we have dr/dφ|r=r0 = 0, where r0 is the distance
of the closest approach. From this condition we find
and then E 2 /L2 = exp [ν (r0 )] /r02 , and therefore, after integrat-

M ing Eq. (35), we obtain [16]

F (u) = 3M u2 + . (27)
L2 ∞
eλ/2 dr
Z
The radius of the circular orbit u0 is obtained as the φ (r) = φ (∞) + q . (36)
r 2 r
solution of the equation eν(r0 )−ν(r) (r/r0 ) − 1

M The deflection angle of a light ray is

u0 = 3M u20 + , (28)
L2
with the only physical solution given by ∆φ = 2 |φ (r0 ) − φ (∞)| − π. (37)
p
1 − 1 − 12M 2 /L2 M Here we have taken into account that in the absence of a
u0 = ≈ 2. (29) gravitational field a light ray propagates along a straight
6M L
line, and precisely for this reason π has appeared in Eq.
Therefore (37).

dF

6πM In the case of the Schwarzschild metric we have eν =
−λ
δφ = π = , (30) e = 1 − 2M/r, which gives
du u=u0 a (1 − e2 )
 5

∞
1 dr
Z
φ (r) = φ (∞) + q . (38)
r0
p 2 r
1 − 2M/r (1 − 2M/r0 ) / (1 − 2M/r) (r/r0 ) − 1

By introducing a new variable r = r0 x, we obtain

Z ∞
1 dx
φ (x) = φ (∞) + p , (39)
1 − 2Rg /x (1 − 2Rg ) / (1 − 2Rg /x) x − 1 x
p
2
1

where Rg = M/r0 . In the case of the Sun, by taking Since

M = M⊙ = 1.989 × 1033 g, c = 2.998 × 1010 cm/s, p
R2 + l22 + l2 4l1 l2
G = 6.67 × 10−8 cm3 g−1 s−2 and r0 = R⊙ = 6.955 × 1010 ln p ≈ ln 2 , (45)
cm, respectively [17], we obtain φ (x) − φ (∞) = 1.5708.
2 2
R + l1 − l1 R
Thus the deflection angle of a light ray by the Sun is where we have used the conditions R2 /l12 ≪ 1 and
∆φ = 1.72752′′.
R2 /l22 ≪ 1, respectively, the time delay for a single pas-
sage of the light ray near the Sun is given by [17]
C. Radar echo delay 4l1 l2
∆t = 2M ln . (46)
R2
A third Solar System test of general relativity is the
radar echo delay [17]. The idea of this test is to mea-
IV. SOLAR SYSTEM TESTS FOR
sure the time required for radar signals to travel to an
HOŘAVA-LIFSHITZ GRAVITY BLACK HOLES
inner planet or satellite in two circumstances: a) when
the signal passes very near the Sun and b) when the ray
does not go near the Sun. The time of travel of light t0 In this Section we consider the standard Solar System
between two planets, situated far away from the Sun, is tests of general relativity (perihelion precession, deflec-
given by tion of light by the Sun and the radar echo delay) in the
case of the Kehagias and Sfetsos’s (KS) asymptotically
Z l2
flat solution [10] of Hořava-Lifshitz gravity.
t0 = dy, (40)
−l1

where l1 and l2 are the distances of the planets to the A. The perihelion precession of the planet Mercury
Sun. If the light travels close to the Sun, the time travel
is The observed value of the perihelion precession of the
Z l2 Z l2 planet Mercury is δϕObs = 43.11 ± 0.21 arcsec per cen-
dy tury [17]. As a first step in the study of the perihelion
t= = e[λ(r)−ν(r)]/2 dy, (41)
−l1 v −l1 precession in Hořava-Lifshitz gravity, we introduce the
variable u = 1/r, and write the metric of the Horava-
where v = e(ν−λ)/2 is the speed of light in the presence Lifshitz theory black hole solution as
of the gravitational field. The time difference is r
ν −λ ω ω 4M 3
Z l2 n o e =e =1+ 2 − 2 1+ u . (47)
∆t = t − t0 = e[λ(r)−ν(r)]/2 − 1 dy. (42) u u ω
−l1
pThe function f (u) is given by f (u) = −ω/u2 +
p
Since r = y 2 + R2 , where R is the radius of the Sun, ω 1 + 4M u3 /ω/u2 . The function G(u), defined as
we have G(u) = f (u)u2 + E 2 /L2 − e−λ /L2 is obtained as
Z l2   √ √   r !
1 4M 3


 
λ y 2 +R2 −ν y 2 +R2 /2
∆t = e − 1 dy. (43) G(u) = −ω 1 + 2 2 1− 1+ u +
−l1
L u ω
1
In the case of the Schwarzschild metric λ = −ν, E2 − 1 .


2
(48)
exp (λ/2 − ν/2) = exp (−ν) = (1 − 2M/r)
−1
≈ 1+ L
2M/r, and therefore For F (u) = (1/2)dG(u)/du we find
Z l2 p r !
dy R2 + l22 + l2 ω 4M 3
∆t = 2M = 2M ln p . (44) F (u) = 2 3 1 − 1 + u +
L u ω
p
−l1 2
y +R 2 R2 + l12 − l1
 6

1.1 and x0 are dimensionless parameters, respectively. Then

1.0 Eq. (50) can be written as
0.9
0.8
ω0 b2 ω0 b2
r  
4 3
x0 / b 2

0.7 3x20 2
−b = 3 + 1+ x x0 − 3 , (51)
x0 ω0 0 x0
0.6
0.5
where b2 = M 2 /L2 .
0.4
0.3 In the case of the planet Mercury we have a =
57.91 × 1011 cm and e = 0.205615, while for the val-
0.2
10−25 10−24 10−23 10−22 10−21 10−20 ues of the mass of the Sun and of the physical constants
ω0 we take M = M⊙ = 1.989 × 1033 g, c = 2.998 × 1010
cm/s, and G = 6.67 × 10−8 cm3 g−1 s−2 , respectively
FIG. 1: Variation of x0 as a function of ω0 . [17]. Mercury also completes 415.2 revolutions each cen-
tury. With the use of these numerical values we first
obtain b2 = M/a 1 − e2 = 2.66136 × 10−8 . By per-


u2
 
1 forming a first order series expansion of the square root
3M 1 + . (49)
L u2
2
q
1 + 4M u 3 in Eq. (51), we obtain the standard general relativistic
ω
equation 3x20 − x0 + b2 = 0, with the physical solution
(GR)
The circular orbits are given by the roots of the equa- x0 ≈ b2 . In the general case, the value of x0 also de-
tion F (u0 ) = u0 , which is given by pends on the numerical value of ω0 , and, for a given ω0 ,
x0 must be obtained by numerically solving the nonlin-
ear algebraic equation Eq. (51). The variation of x0 as a
r  
2 M ω 4M 3 ω
3M u0 − 2 = 2 3 + 1 + u u0 − 2 3 . (50) function of ω0 is represented in Fig. 1.
L L u0 ω 0 L u0
The perihelion precession is given by δφ =
In order to solve Eq. (50) we represent the parame- π (dF (u)/du) |u=u0 , and in the variables x0 and ω0 can
ter ω as ω = ω0 /M 2 , and u0 as u0 = x0 /M , where ω0 be written as

√ n h  p  p io
3 ω0 2 x30 + ω0 x50 + b2 2x60 + 6ω0 − 4 ω0 (4x30 + ω0 ) x30 + ω02 − ω03 (4x30 + ω0 )


δφ = π 3/2
. (52)
x40 (4x30 + ω0 )

The variation of the perihelion precession angle as a function of ω0 is represented in Fig. 2. Thus, for ω0 ≈ 7×10−16 ,
the value of the precession angle is 43 arcsec per century.

B. Light deflection by the Sun

The deflection angle of light rays passing nearby the Sun in the Kehagias and Sfetsos’s geometry is given by

h p i−1/2
Z ∞ 1 + ωr2 − r(ω 2 r3 + 4ωM ) dr
φ (r) = φ (∞) + rh . (53)
r 2
p
2 3
i
2
h
2
p
2 3
i r
1 + ωr0 − r0 (ω r0 + 4ωM ) (r/r0 ) / 1 + ωr − r(ω r + 4ωM ) − 1

By introducing a new variable x by means of the transformation r = r0 x, Eq. (53) can be written as

h p i−1/2
Z ∞ 1 + ωr02 x2 − r0 x(ω 2 r03 x3 + 4ωM ) dx
φ (r0 ) = φ (∞) + rh . (54)
1 2
p
2 3
i
2
h
2 2
p
2 3 3
i x
1 + ωr0 − r0 (ω r0 + 4ωM ) x / 1 + ωr0 x − r0 x(ω r0 x + 4ωM ) − 1
 7

160
δ φ [arcsec / century] 140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
ω0 [10 −16 ]

FIG. 2: Variation of the planetary precession angle δφ (in

arcseconds per century) as a function of ω0 .

By representing ω as ω = ω0 /M 2 , and r0 as r0 = x0 M , we obtain

h p i−1/2
Z ∞ 1 + ω0 x20 x2 − x0 x(ω02 x30 x3 + 4ω0 ) dx
φ (x0 ) = φ (∞) + rh . (55)
1 2
p
2 3
i
2
h
2 2
p
2 3 3
i x
1 + ω0 x0 − x0 (ω0 x0 + 4ω0 ) x / 1 + ω0 x0 x − x0 x(ω0 x0 x + 4ω0 ) − 1

1.74
C. Radar echo delay

1.72

The best experimental Solar System constraints on

DΦ HarcsecL

1.70
1.68
1.66
-16
5. ´ 10 1. ´ 10
FIG. 3: The light deflection angle ∆φ (in arcseconds) as a
function of the parameter ω0 .
For the Sun, by taking r0 = R⊙ = 6.955 × 1010 cm, we
find for x0 the value x0 = 4.71194 × 105 . The varia-
tion of the deflection angle ∆φ = 2 |φ (x0 ) − φ (∞)| − π
is represented, as a function of ω0 , in Fig. 3. The ob-
servational value of the deflection angle of ∆φ = 1.7275
arcsec corresponds to ω0 = 10−15 .
time delay so far have come from the Viking lander
on Mars [18]. In the Viking mission two transponders
landed on Mars and two others continued to orbit round
it. The latter two transmitted two distinct bands of
frequencies, and thus the Solar coronal effect could be
-15 -15 -15 -15
corrected for. For the time delay of the signals emit-
1.5 ´ 10 2. ´ 10 2.5 ´ 10
ted on Earth, and which graze the Sun, one obtains
Ω0 (GR)
∆tRD = ∆tRD (1 + ∆RD ), with ∆RD ≤ 0.002 [18].
For the case of the Earth-Mars-Sun system we have
RE = l1 = 1.525 × 1013 cm (the distance Earth-Sun) and
RP = l2 = 2.491 × 1013 cm (the distance Mars-Sun). The
radius of the Sun is R⊙ = 6.955 × 1010 cm. With these
values the standard general relativistic radar echo delay
(GR) 2


has the value ∆tRD ≈ 4M ln 4l1 l2 /R⊙ ≈ 2.4927 ×
10−4 s. With the use of Eq. (43), it follows that the time
delay for the Kehagias and Sfetsos’s black hole solution
of Hoř ava-Lifshitz gravity can be represented as

 

q
2 2 −3/2
ω y +R 2 2
1 + (4M/ω) (y + R ) −1
l2
2
Z
∆tRD = q  dy. (56)
c −l1 2 2 2 2 −3/2
1 − ω (y + R ) 1 + (4M/ω) (y + R ) −1
 8

By introducing a new variable ξ defined as y = 2ξM , and by representing again ω as ω = ω0 /M 2 , we obtain for the
time delay the expression
 
2 2

q −3/2
Z ξ2 ξ +a 2
1 + (1/2ω0) (ξ + a ) 2 −1
16M
∆tRD = ω0 q  dξ, (57)
c −ξ1 −3/2
1 − 4ω0 (ξ 2 + a2 ) 1 + (1/2ω0 ) (ξ 2 + a2 ) −1

2.4925 of the parameter ω of the model. The parameter ω, hav-

ing the physical dimensions of length−2 , is constrained
2.492 by the perihelion precession of the planet Mercury to
2
a value of ω = 7 × 10−16 /M⊙ = 3.212 × 10−26 cm−2 ,
∆ tRD [10 −4s]

2.4915 while the radar echo delay experiment suggests a value

2.491
2.4905
2.49
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
ω0 [10 −15 ]
FIG. 4: Variation of the time delay ∆tRD as a function of ω0 .
where a2 = R⊙ 2
/4M⊙2
, ξ1 = l1 /2M⊙, and ξ2 = l2 /2M⊙,
respectively. The variation of the time delay as a function
of ω0 is represented in Fig. 4.
The general relativistic value ∆tRD = 2.4927 × 10−4
is obtained for ω0 ≈ 4 × 10−15 . For ω0 = 7 × 10−16 , the
numerical value of the time delay is ∆tRD = 2.4885 ×
10−4 s.
V. DISCUSSIONS AND FINAL REMARKS
In the present paper we have considered the observa-
tional and experimental possibilities for testing, at the
level of the Solar System, the Kehagias and Sfetsos’s so-
lution of the vacuum field equations in Hořava-Lifshitz
gravity. We have found that this solution can give a very
satisfactory description of all the gravitational phenom-
ena in the Solar System. The classical tests of general rel-
ativity (perihelion precession, light deflection and radar
echo delay) give strong constraints on the numerical value
2
of ω = 4 × 10−15 /M⊙ = 1.835 × 10−25 cm−2 . The de-
flection angle of the light rays by the Sun can be fully
explained in Hořava-Lifshitz gravity with the parameter
2
ω having the value ω = 10−15 /M⊙ = 4.5899 × 10−26 . It
is interesting to note that the values of ω obtained from
the study of the light deflection by the Sun and of the
4 4.5 5 perihelion precession of the planet Mercury are extremely
close, while the radar echo delay experiments provide a
larger value.
Thus, the study of the classical tests of general rel-
ativity provide a very powerful method for constrain-
ing the allowed parameter space of the Hořava-Lifshitz
gravity solutions, and to provide a deeper insight into
the physical nature and properties of the corresponding
spacetime metrics. Therefore, this opens the possibil-
ity of testing Hořava-Lifshitz gravity by using astronom-
ical and astrophysical observations at the Solar System
scale. Of course, this analysis requires developing gen-
eral methods for the high precision study of the classical
tests in arbitrary spherically symmetric spacetimes. In
the present paper we have provided some basic theoret-
ical tools necessary for the in depth comparison of the
predictions of the Hořava-Lifshitz gravity model with the
observational/experimental results.
Acknowledgments
The work of T. H. was supported by the General Re-
search Fund grant number HKU 701808P of the govern-
ment of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

[1] P. Hořava, JHEP 0903, 020 (2009).
[2] P. Hořava, Phys. Rev. D 79, 084008 (2009).
[3] T. P. Sotiriou, M. Visser and S. Weinfurtner,
arXiv:0904.4464 [hep-th]; M. Visser, arXiv:0902.0590
[hep-th]; P. Horava, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 161301 (2009);
R. G. Cai, Y. Liu and Y. W. Sun, JHEP 0906, 010
(2009); B. Chen and Q. G. Huang, arXiv:0904.4565
[hep-th]; D. Orlando and S. Reffert, arXiv:0905.0301
[hep-th]; R. G. Cai, B. Hu and H. B. Zhang,
arXiv:0905.0255 [hep-th]; T. Nishioka, arXiv:0905.0473
[hep-th]; M. Li and Y. Pang, arXiv:0905.2751 [hep-th];
C. Charmousis, G. Niz, A. Padilla and P. M. Saffin,
arXiv:0905.2579 [hep-th]; T. P. Sotiriou, M. Visser and
S. Weinfurtner, arXiv:0905.2798 [hep-th]; G. Calcagni,
arXiv:0905.3740 [hep-th]; D. Blas, O. Pujolas and
S. Sibiryakov, arXiv:0906.3046 [hep-th]; R. Iengo,

J. G. Russo and M. Serone, arXiv:0906.3477 [hep-th].
C. Germani, A. Kehagias and K. Sfetsos, arXiv:0906.1201
[hep-th]; S. Mukohyama, arXiv:0906.5069 [hep-th];
A. Kobakhidze, arXiv:0906.5401 [hep-th]; C. Appignani,
R. Casadio and S. Shankaranarayanan, arXiv:0907.3121
[hep-th]; J. Kluson, arXiv:0907.3566 [hep-th]; N. Af-
shordi, arXiv:0907.5201 [hep-th].
[4] G. Calcagni, arXiv:0904.0829 [hep-th]; E. Kiritsis
and G. Kofinas, arXiv:0904.1334 [hep-th]; S. Muko-
hyama, JCAP 0906, 001 (2009); R. Brandenberger,
arXiv:0904.2835 [hep-th]; Y. S. Piao, arXiv:0904.4117
[hep-th]; X. Gao, arXiv:0904.4187 [hep-th]; S. Muko-
hyama, K. Nakayama, F. Takahashi and S. Yokoyama,
arXiv:0905.0055 [hep-th]; T. Ha, Y. Huang, Q. Ma,
K. D. Pechan, T. J. Renner, Z. Wu and A. Wang,
arXiv:0905.0396 [physics.pop-ph]; S. Kalyana Rama,
arXiv:0905.0700 [hep-th]; B. Chen, S. Pi and J. Z. Tang,
arXiv:0905.2300 [hep-th]; X. Gao, Y. Wang, R. Branden-
berger and A. Riotto, arXiv:0905.3821 [hep-th]; M. Mi-
namitsuji, arXiv:0905.3892 [astro-ph.CO]; A. Wang
and Y. Wu, arXiv:0905.4117 [hep-th]; S. Nojiri and
S. D. Odintsov, arXiv:0905.4213 [hep-th]; Y. F. Cai and
E. N. Saridakis, arXiv:0906.1789 [hep-th]; A. Wang and
R. Maartens, arXiv:0907.1748 [hep-th]; T. Kobayashi,
Y. Urakawa and M. Yamaguchi, arXiv:0908.1005 [astro-
ph.CO].
[5] E. N. Saridakis, arXiv:0905.3532 [hep-th]; M. i. Park,
arXiv:0906.4275 [hep-th].
[6] S. Mukohyama, arXiv:0905.3563 [hep-th].
[7] H. Nastase, arXiv:0904.3604 [hep-th]; R. G. Cai,
L. M. Cao and N. Ohta, arXiv:0904.3670 [hep-th];
Y. S. Myung and Y. W. Kim, arXiv:0905.0179 [hep-th];
View publication stats
9
R. G. Cai, L. M. Cao and N. Ohta, arXiv:0905.0751
[hep-th]; R. B. Mann, JHEP 0906, 075 (2009); S. Chen
and J. Jing, arXiv:0905.1409 [gr-qc]; M. Botta-Cantcheff,
N. Grandi and M. Sturla, arXiv:0906.0582 [hep-th];
A. Castillo and A. Larranaga, arXiv:0906.4380 [gr-
qc]; J. J. Peng and S. Q. Wu, arXiv:0906.5121 [hep-
th]. E. O. Colgain and H. Yavartanoo, arXiv:0904.4357
[hep-th]; H. W. Lee, Y. W. Kim and Y. S. Myung,
arXiv:0907.3568 [hep-th]; S. S. Kim, T. Kim and Y. Kim,
arXiv:0907.3093 [hep-th].
[8] M. i. Park, arXiv:0905.4480 [hep-th].
[9] H. Lu, J. Mei and C. N. Pope, arXiv:0904.1595 [hep-th].
[10] A. Kehagias and K. Sfetsos, Phys. Lett. B 678, 123
(2009).
[11] R. A. Konoplya, arXiv:0905.1523 [hep-th].
[12] S. Chen and J. Jing, arXiv:0905.2055 [gr-qc].
[13] J. Chen and Y. Wang, arXiv:0905.2786 [gr-qc].
[14] T. Harko, Z. Kovacs and F. S. N. Lobo, to appear in
Phys.Rev.D, arXiv:0907.1449 [gr-qc].
[15] C. G. Boehmer, T. Harko and F. S. N. Lobo, Class.
Quant. Grav. 25, 045015 (2008).
[16] S. Weinberg, Gravitation and cosmology: principles and
applications of the general theory of relativity, New York,
Wiley (1972).
[17] I. I. Shapiro, W. B. Smith, M. E. Ash and S. Herrick,
Astron. J. 76, 588 (1971); I. I. Shapiro, C. C. Counselman
and R. W. King, Phys. Rev. Lett. 36, 555 (1976).
[18] R. D. Reasenberg, I. I. Shapiro, P. E. MacNeil, R. B.
Goldstein, J. C. Breidenthal, J. P. Brenkle, D. L. Cain,
T. M. Kaufman, T. A. Komarek and A. I. Zygielbaum,
Astrophys. J. 234L, 219 (1979).